am I the only one?

Question

who thinks perhaps some of what Paul wrote in his letters isn't very biblical?
There is some stuff he wrote that seems to fall more along Pharisaical rules than biblical truth.

Example:
Women aren't to talk or teach men.

But wasn't it women who Jesus first revealed himself to, and women who went to the disciples who were hiding?

Answer 1

Agreed...have to read them carefully...most of his letters are chiding one church or another for their teachings...

Answer 2

I don't necessarily agree with you. I think Paul was writing his letters to certain churches for specific reasons. Thus while they're interesting, and there's some advice that does still apply today, it doesn't exactly all translate over.

For example, back then women didn't have the same access to education as men did, so they really wouldn't have made good teachers anyway.

I've also read that the way churches were set up, men and women sat of different sides of the church, and the women would yell across to their husbands if they had a question about what was being taught. (Which happened, as they weren't as educated.) Thus Paul tells them to be quiet wait until they get home to ask their husbands.

I wouldn't say that what Paul says isn't biblical, because by definition it's in the Bible so it's "biblical" whether you think it's on par with Christianity or not. I do think however that we should consider the cultural context before applying it word-for-word literally to our lives today.

Answer 3

Seeing how He was a Pharisee, and a son of Pharisees, one could understand how his writings would lean toward that tendency. He was appointed a preacher and an apostle, as a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth. The inspiration of the Holy Spirit within his writings are evident, even if his style was man influenced.

When reading any letter, of which most of Paul's writings are, we have to keep in mind the context and cultural mores of that time. Many addressed specific issues the churches in that area were having. The Spiritual truths behind these statements are what matters and is relevant to our understanding.

Let's say, for example, that a statement is made saying "women and children will not be allowed to go with the men." Literally, this could be interpreted a discriminatory. The real spirit of the statement may have been one of protection. It depends on the context in which the statement was made.

Answer 4

You seem to have fallen into the fallacy of attributing our current standards to that of the past. And also thinking that the bible is some sort of letter written in pauls desk to everyone across time, before him and after. That's a rather high criteria.

It's quite obvious that if paul we're alive right now, he'd have different things to say. Notice how there is no mention in the bible about internet pornography. If you can show any verse in scripture that mentions internet pornography, then your bible is ilegitamate.

The real cool thing to see about paul, and what his claim to authority was, is that he was inspired by god to say what people needed to hear, that it was so important that pahrisaical authority should be supplanted by the teachings of himself and other apostles. And god had so chosen him to speak these things because of his life experiences and conversion. He had gone through an experiences and learned the things needed to say what god needed him to say. Furthermore, god was inspiring him to seek out what he should say to the people to be a good pastor.

There was one in the crowd that had the right idea and willingness, and it just happened to be a former pharisee.

Answer 5

I completely agree. There is nothing that Paul wrote that agrees with what Jesus taught or said in the Gospels.

Answer 6

Trying to parse fiction from fact in the story of Paul is pretty tough. This is my attempt:

Saul was a secret policeman. His job was to infiltrate illegal groups and document their activities. Like other such people before and since, he was moved the ideology of those upon whom he spying, in this case the proto-Christian group in Jerusalem headed by Jesus' brother, James.

Saul was unable to reconcile his Pharisaical belief in the Law with his emotional attachment to James and his group. His psyche reconciled the incompatibility by inflicting on Saul a psychotic episode, by virtue of which he became Paul and the advocate extraordinaire of Christianity.

Answer 7

I think many atheists would agree with you.

Also, some books like 1 & 2 Timothy were not actually written by Paul, but were written after his death in his name. Some of the anti-women scriptures in the Epistles were probably agenda-driven additions by men who wanted to devalue women's roles in Church.

Answer 8

Examples?

Answer 9

I don't believe so. There were a few times when he specifically mentioned that what he was saying were HIS words, not the Lord's, but all of it came from a heart that loved Jesus.

Answer 10

No...you aren't the only one.
...there are a lot of people like you that say absurd things like this.

Answer 11

You can't pick what you want to believe in the bible either u believe in it or u don't. The whole bible from Genesis to Revelation it all go together. You can't believe in the old testament and not believe in the new testament. It was all written under the inspiration of god, its up to you to believe and experience god powerful words. God word are full of the spirit. There's power in his word. The word is a lamp to our feet and a light to our path. I pray that you will grow in his word more and more everyday in Jesus Name Amen